Candidates in the classroom

Ah, November ' the month of wool-knit cardigans, family get-togethers and participation in the meaningless fiction of democracy.\nThat's right, November's just around the corner.\nIt's election season, in case you were a gimp kept in a cellar for perverse sadomasochistic purposes.\nMany pundits have been prattling about the respective education policies of the candidates. After all, education is an issue key to winning over soccer moms in swing states. But few of these Sabbath gasbags, who so pollute CNN with their babble and off-base predictions, actually examine what we're learning from the election.\nAnd I must say, this presidential race has been very educational.\nFor instance, I never would have guessed New York Times reporter Adam Clymer was a "major league asshole." George W. Bush seems to think so. And I can't say I knew the American people apparently get a kick out of watching hot Gore-on-Gore action.\n(Note to soccer moms: What transpired between Al and Tipper at the convention was not passion. I'm leafing through my unabridged Merriam-Webster dictionary to find the more fitting term. Oh, here it is: manipulation.)\nI've learned that, if I were a Jewish vice presidential candidate for a major party on the Conan O'Brien show, I would not croon any Frank Sinatra. And I've learned that the inspiring firebrand Dick Cheney would have made Harry Truman look like Bob Dole on the stump.\nIt's now apparent to me that the public doesn't think of wearing your religion on your sleeve as shameless pandering. On the contrary, it means a veritable boost in the polls. Maybe if I pray to Yahweh real hard, I too can be elected to the Senate. Why, I can see it now: "I yield the floor to the distinguished gentleman without any pants."\nI've learned that knowing how to properly speak English isn't really a criterion for being a presidential candidate. George W. Bush has taught me that working families struggle to "put food on their families." He's also informed me that terriers play an important role in economics. And to think all that time I just thought they were cute little dogs.\nJust last week, Bush helped me to expand my vocabulary.\nWhen grilled by reporters about a controversial ad, he repeatedly used the term "subliminable."\nYou see, he had been accused of sending a subliminal message in an ad that attacks Gore's health care proposal. Basically, the ad blasts Gore for wanting to take the choice between HMOs out of the people's hands and instead transfer it to the federal government. The word "bureaucrats" floats up onto the screen, and for about a thirtieth of a second it reads "rats." \nThe press caught on about two weeks after it was released, taking Bush to task with allegations of going negative.\nEven if it wasn't intentionally inserted, someone had to intentionally leave it in. After all, these political ad guys don't start work on these ads at 3 a.m. the day before deadline. They meticulously put together and edit these ads. \nPersonally, I don't see why anyone would get all fussy over an alleged subliminal insult in a Christ-forsaken attack ad. The ad overtly criticizes Gore. It belligerently criticizes Gore. It makes no bones whatsoever about criticizing Gore. At the end of the day, it makes no difference if it accuses him of being a "rat."\nAnd it's not as though politicians haven't been called worse. We seem to have forgotten the proud history of vicious mudslinging in American politics. Back in the first presidential election in 1776, George Washington called Abraham Lincoln "a crack-addled degenerate," a "really tall freak" and a "Nazi." Had he not mercilessly trashed Abe's character, it's unlikely he would have been swept into office. And then he never would have made all those great and fabled accomplishments ' like, um, being reelected to a second term.\nIt seems I've digressed from the main point of this column. I think it had to do with education or something.